Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board
v.
Matthew L. Noel

The respondent contends the Grievance Commission erred (1) in relying on the doctrine of issue preclusion, (2) in admitting minutes of testimony from a criminal case as evidence in the Grievance Commission hearing, (3) in finding his actions reflected adversely on his fitness to practice law, and (4) when it found he did not attempt to pay restitution until he was ordered to do so in his criminal case. The respondent also argues (5) he did not knowingly violate Iowa Rule of Professional Responsibility 32:1.5, (6) the recommended sanction of a one-year suspension is inconsistent with sanctions imposed in similar cases, and (7) a suspension of 90 days would be an appropriate sanction in this case.